HomeMy WebLinkAbout181211aIndividuals requiring special accommodations are requested to contact the Office of the County Commissioners, 240.313.2200 Voice/TDD, to make
arrangements.
Page | 1
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
December 11, 2018
OPEN SESSION AGENDA
09:00 A.M. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CALL TO ORDER, President Jeffrey A. Cline
APPROVAL OF MINUTES – November 27, 2018
09:05 A.M. COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS AND COMMENTS
09:15 A.M. REPORTS FROM COUNTY STAFF
09:25 A.M. CITIZENS PARTICIPATION
09:35 A.M. QUARTERLY REPORT AND REVENUE UPDATE - Sara Greaves, Chief Financial
Officer
09:40 A.M. WASHINGTON COUNTY BLACK FLY CONTROL
PROGRAM – Delegate Neil Parrott
09:50 A.M. MARYLAND THEATRE FUNDING REQUEST – Jessica Green, Executive Director,
The Maryland Theatre, and Benito Vattelana, Board President, The Maryland Theatre
10:05 A.M. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATIVE PURCHASE (INGT-18-011) – SIX (6)
2019 CHEVROLET TAHOE POLICE PURSUIT VEHICLES FOR THE
WASHINGTON COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT – Brandi Naugle, CPPB,
Buyer, Purchasing Department, and Cody Miller, Property Planning, Fleet Management,
and Grants Manager, Washington County Sheriff’s Department
10:10 A.M. CONSTRUCTION BID AWARD – TRANSIT BUS SHELTERS – Scott Hobbs, P.E.,
Director, Division of Engineering
10:15 A.M. BRIEF THE BOARD ON THE COUNTY’S HIRING PROCEDURES – Deb Peyton,
Director, Health & Human Services
10:25 A.M. ETHICS COMMISSION MEMBERS – APPOINTMENT PROCESS – Cort
Meinelschmidt, County Commissioner
Jeffrey A. Cline,
Terry L. Baker, Vice President
Randall E. Wagner
Wayne K. Keefer
Cort F. Meinelschmidt
WWW.WASHCO-MD.NET
Individuals requiring special accommodations are requested to contact the Office of the County Commissioners, 240.313.2200 Voice/TDD, to make
arrangements.
Page | 2
10:30 A.M. CLOSED SESSION
(To discuss the appointment, employment, assignment, promotion, discipline, demotion, compensation, removal, resignation,
or performance evaluation of appointees, employees, or officials over whom this public body has jurisdiction; or any other
personnel matter that affects one or more specific individuals; to consult with counsel to obtain legal advice on a legal
matter; To consult with staff, consultants, or other individuals about pending or potential litigation; to consider a matter that
concerns the proposal for a business or industrial organization to locate, expand, or remain in the State; and to discuss
public security, if the public body determines that public discussion would constitute a risk to the public or to public security,
including: (i) the development of fire and police services and staff; and (ii) the development and implementation of
emergency plan.)
12:15 P.M. ADJOURNMENT
Board of County Commissioners have been invited to attend the “Annual Washington County
Department of Social Services Holiday Luncheon”
Location: 122 North Potomac Street, Hagerstown MD
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Quarterly Report and Revenue Summary
PRESENTATION DATE: December 11, 2018
PRESENTATION BY: Sara Greaves, Chief Financial Officer
RECOMMENDATION: For informational purposes
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Office of Budget and Finance would like to brief the commissioners
on the first quarter report for FY2019 and the most current monthly revenue summary.
DISCUSSION: A quarterly report is provided to the commissioners for quarters 1 through 3 of
each fiscal year. This report provides the commissioners with real time data and budget to actual
comparisons of major revenues and expenditures. It also provides economic data including
unemployment rates and housing statistics.
In addition, each month the commissioners receive a revenue summary which provides the
County’s position on major revenue sources. This summary also provides a year-end projection
based on the current budget to actual trend. This is meant to be a soft projection and will become
more reliable as the year progresses.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Quarterly Report September 2018
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: None
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
W
A
S
H
I
N
G
T
O
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
,
M
A
R
Y
L
A
N
D
S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 8
F I S C A L & E C O N O M I C
U P D A T E
Employment Data 1
Earnings Data 2
Spending Data 3
Housing Data 4
Revenue Trends 5
Summary of Major
Expenditure Trends
6
Projected Outstanding Debt June 30, 2019 7
Statement of Purpose 8
Inside this Report:
M A J O R E C O N O M I C T R E N D S
The following economic and community data trendlines display changes in data over time. Specifically,
they show whether a particular set of data has increased or decreased over a certain period. Trendlines
offer a simple way to identify or confirm changes in indicators, usually based on one, three, or five year
periods of observation. This section offers trendline summaries which offer a snapshot of information and
measure its recent economic and community performance on important metrics. Information presented in
this section is based on the most recent data available at report date.
E M P L O Y M E N T D A T A
9.01 9.03
13.19
18.32 17.02
8.40
9.39
11.73
19.03
17.48
5
10
15
20
Govt Constr, Mfg,
Mining
Professional &
Financial
Education,
Health, Other
Transp,
Utilities,Trade
Average Employment by Industry (thousands)
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Q3
Source: Maryland Department of Licensing and Regulation
3.2 3.2
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Number of Unemployed (thousands)
Source: Maryland Department of Licensing and Regulation
Page 2 F I S C A L & E C O N O M I C U P D A T E
E M P L O Y M E N T D A T A ( C O N T I N U E D )
S P E N D I N G D A T A
4.20%4.20%
3%
4%
5%
6%
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
County Unemployment Rate
Source: Department of Licensing and Regulation
4.00%4.20%
3%
4%
5%
6%
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
State Unemployment Rate
Source: Department of Licensing and Regulation
4.20%3.70%
3%
4%
5%
6%
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
National Unemployment Rate
Source: Department of Licensing and Regulation
2.20%2.30%
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Consumer Price Index
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Page 3 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 8
P E R M I T D A T A
1,221
1,329
0
500
1,000
1,500
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Millions National Construction Spending
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
8.60 9.11
0
4
8
12
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Millions
Consumer Spending Patterns -Washington County
Sales & Use Tax Collections
Source:MD Comptroller of the Treasury
3.00 2.99
0
1
2
3
4
5
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Millions Gross Lodging Revenues
67,343
2,418
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Sq Ft Non-Residential New Permit Activity
Page 4 F I S C A L & E C O N O M I C U P D A T E
H O U S I N G D A T A
17
23
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
New Housing Permits
(County & City)
193,838 208,735
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Average Price of Home Sold in Washington County
171 151
0
50
100
150
200
250
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Homes Sold in Washington County
645 686
0
200
400
600
800
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Housing Inventory in Washington County
Page 5 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 8
R E V E N U E T R E N D S
40
50
60
70
80
90
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Millions Income Tax Revenue
Actual
Budget
0
2
4
6
8
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Millions Recordation Revenue
Actual
Budget
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Millions Tipping Fees
Actual
Budget
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Millions Real Estate Revenue
Actual
Budget
S U M M A R Y O F M A J O R E X P E N D I T U R E T R E N D S
Page 6 F I S C A L & E C O N O M I C U P D A T E
Operating Activity by Major Fund (in millions)
Fund Budget Spent Encumbered Unexpended % Expended
General 231.4 63.9 3.7 163.8 28%
Highway 11.2 2.3 0.2 8.6 20%
Solid Waste 8.1 1.7 2.1 4.4 20%
Water 1.5 0.3 0.0 1.1 20%
Sewer 12.7 2.9 0.1 9.6 23%
Transit 2.6 0.6 0.1 1.8 24%
Airport 2.0 0.4 0.1 1.5 20%
Golf Course 1.2 0.3 0.0 0.9 26%
Total 270.5 72.4 6.4 191.7 27%
The table to the left
compares major year-
to-date expenditure
activity to budgeted
funding. It incorpo-
rates the variance by
dollar and percentage
along with total ex-
penditure activity.
Funds expended and
encumbered should
average around 25%, if
not subject to seasonal
or recurring charges.
Fuel Purchased and Weighted Average Price Per Gallon
Area
Gasoline Diesel
Gallons
Purchased
Average Cost
Gallons
Purchased
Average Cost
Airport 1,207 2.57 552 2.29
Golf Course 2,443 2.48 1,880 2.37
Highway 29,187 2.38 33,918 2.19
Parks 6,785 2.55 1,062 2.35
Solid Waste 500 2.52 14,700 2.18
Transit 0 0 21,600 2.20
Public Safety 35,605 2.55 1,138 2.42
Water Quality 7,568 2.57 3,768 2.37
Weighted Average 2.53 2.28
Budgeted Unit Price 2.50 2.25
Source: retail price from eia.gov
Source: retail price from eia.gov
$1
$2
$3
$4
$5
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Gasoline Prices
Retail Bid Bu lk
$1
$2
$3
$4
$5
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Diesel Prices
Retail Bid Bulk
Page 7 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 8 Page 7 S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 8
The charts to the left
represent current out-
standing debt and antici-
pated borrowing for the
current fiscal year ended
2019. Final determina-
tion of new bond issue
amounts are typically
made in the 4th quarter
of the fiscal year barring
any change in issuance
patterns.
Bond Ratings
Rating Agency Fiscal Year 2018
Rating
Standard & Poor’s AA+
Moody’s Aa1
Fitch AA+
P R O J E C T E D O U T S T A N D I N G D E B T J U N E 2 0 1 9
Public Safety,
$11.8 , 8%
Other, $15.4 ,
11%
Education,
$48.3 , 33%
Roads, $58.9 ,
40%
Infrastructure,
$11.6 , 8%
Projected Outstanding Debt FY 2019 -General Fund -
$146.0 M
Solid Waste,
$16.5 , 8%Airport,
$0.6 , 1%
Water &
Sewer,
$31.5 , 16%
General,
$143.3 , 75%
Projected Outstanding Debt FY 2018 -All Funds -
$191.9 M
Solid Waste,
$14.3 , 7%Airport,
$0.5 , 1%
Water &
Sewer,
$30.0 , 16%
General,
$146.0 , 76%
Projected Outstanding Debt FY 2019 -All Funds -
$190.8 M
Terry L. Baker
County Commissioner, President
tbaker@washco-md.net
Jeffrey A. Cline
County Commissioner, Vice President
jcline@washco-md.net
John F. Barr
County Commissioner
jbarr@washco-md.net
LeRoy E. Myers
County Commissioner
lmyers@washco-md.net
Wayne K. Keefer
County Commissioner
wkeefer@washco-md.net
Robert J. Slocum
County Administrator
rslocum@washco-md.net
100 West Washington Street
Hagerstown, Md 21740
www. washco-md.net
W A S H I N G T O N C O U N T Y , M A R Y L A N D
impact on operations and financial
results. Management views this in-
terim period as an integral part of
the annual period.
The report includes information re-
garding some of the more notable
recent developments that may im-
pact County finances, along with
summarized information relating to
various operations within the county
and the economic trends. This report
is general in nature. The reader is
cautioned that it does not provide
the level of detail nor the compre-
hensive scope found in a fiscal year-
end financial statement. Those desir-
This report is designed to communi-
cate the County’s major financial
trends for the indicated period since
the issuance of the prior audited fi-
nancial statements.
This report is interim in nature and
abbreviated in that it does not include
details for all the various funds main-
tained by the county. Additionally, this
report omits many of the required
note disclosures typically found in a
fiscal year-end financial statement
report. The information contained
here is intended to allow manage-
ment to make limited assessments of
near-term trends that may have an
ing or needing such information
should contact The Office of Budget
and Finance.
We hope that you find this report in-
formative and meaningful. If you have
any questions regarding this report,
please contact The Office of Budget
and Finance at 240-313-2300.
This report is provided for general in-
formation use only. The information
contained in the document speaks
only as of its report date.
S T A T E M E N T O F P U R P O S E
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Washington County Black Fly Control Program
PRESENTATION DATE: December 11, 2018
PRESENTATION BY: Delegate Neil Parrott
RECOMMENDED MOTION: To Approve funding for the Black Fly Control Program
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: To request financial support to contribute to the cost of the Black Fly
Control Program in Washington County, that will be used toward spraying the Black Flies in the
Potomac River during warm weather months.
DISCUSSION: Black Flies form swarms that are attracted to both people and animals. They get
in the eyes, ears, and mouth, and like mosquitos they seek blood by biting their victims. Many
people have reactions to these bites, such as itchy and long lasting welts or full blown allergic
reactions. Horses and other animals also suffer from the bites. Black Flies are a problem for a
major part of the year, and we are finding that they are increasingly causing problems to tourist
destinations and outdoor recreation areas, in addition to depriving residents of the overall
enjoyment of their homes and property.
In 2016, H.B. 870 (“Black Fly Control Program”) provided for funding in FY 2018 to reduce the
Black Fly population which has plagued the Potomac River basin particularly in Washington
County as far as 15 miles or even more away from the river. This program allows the spraying of
Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis (Bti), a naturally occurring bacterium lethal to black flies at the
larval stage but harmless to other organisms in the river. This takes place by helicopter over the
Potomac River, the main source of the black flies
With the Black Fly Control Program, the Washington County Delegation has heard from
constituents that the program is working and they have seen a reduction in Black Flies in the
county. As the State Budget is discussed and evaluated for FY 2020 by the Department of
Budget and Management, I believe that the funding for Black Fly Control Program has a better
chance of being approved if Washington County has also put financial support behind the
project.
FISCAL IMPACT: $25,000 – $62,500
CONCURRENCES: Judy Warner
ALTERNATIVES: The State chooses not to fund the program because it does not have local
support and the Black Flies continue to afflict Southern Washington County.
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
ATTACHMENTS: Cost sheet and Cost sheet explanation provided by the Department of
Agriculture, PowerPoint Presentation on the Black Flies in Southern Washington County.
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: PowerPoint Presentation
Explanation of the black fly control spreadsheet
Black fly larval habitat can be identified by identifying areas of white water, of riffles, in a large rivers.
On the Potomac River, the greatest source of black flies in Washington County is near Harper’s Ferry. In
the pilot program, we applied pesticides to 6 locations in the Harper’s Ferry location. Two of these
locations were below the confluence with the Shenandoah River and Four were above the confluence
with the Shenandoah River. The cost of treating each of these sites is show in the spreadsheet. The cost
of treating all six sites is shown in the spreadsheet. That cost is 207,667.20 dollars at an application cost
of 130 per gallon. There are four other sites on the Potomac that will produce black flies when the
water levels drop, likely in July, August and September. The cost of treating each of those four sites is
$6,246.24.
It is suggested that you add 50,000 dollars to these totals in order to hire someone to run this program.
The person that runs this program should be given a Position Identification Number (PIN). This may be
necessary due to the workload and current limited resources within both DNR and MDA.
Total Estimate for an entire season on the Potomac River- $250,000.00
The insecticide to treat any river for black flies is Vectobac 12AS. This is a bacterial insecticide that has
the active ingredient of bacillus thuringiensis variety israelensis. Also, the estimates here are based on
average stream flow.
Site Site - Below Shenandoah Totals
Potomac River Month Flow Flow rate at this site Gals Bti Cost of just pesticide app @130.00/gal *
1 July 4,500 23.4 3042
1 July 4,500 23.4 3042
1 August 4,100 21.32 2771.6
1 August 4,100 21.32 2771.6
1 September 3,900 20.28 2636.4
1 September 3,900 20.28 2636.4
1 May 12,000 62.4 8112
1 May 12,000 62.4 8112
1 June 8,000 41.6 5408
1 June 8,000 41.6 5408
43940
1 July 4,500 23.4 3042
1 July 4,500 23.4 3042
1 August 4,100 21.32 2771.6
1 August 4,100 21.32 2771.6
1 September 3,900 20.28 2636.4
1 September 3,900 20.28 2636.4
1 May 12,000 62.4 8112
1 May 12,000 62.4 8112
1 June 8,000 41.6 5408
1 June 8,000 41.6 5408
43940
3 July 4,500 1,440 3,060 15.912 2068.56
3 July 4,500 1,440 3,060 15.912 2068.56
3 August 4,100 1,510 2,590 13.468 1750.84
3 August 4,100 1,510 2,590 13.468 1750.84
Site 3. Above confluence of Shanandoah and Potomac (the flow at Point of Rocks - the flow of Shenandoah at Milville = the flow rate at this location).
Site 1. between 340 bridge and shenandoah river confluence.
Site 2. between 340 bridge and shenandoah river confluence.
Cost for this site
Cost for this site
Site Site - Below Shenandoah Totals
Potomac River Month Flow Flow rate at this site Gals Bti Cost of just pesticide app @130.00/gal *
3 September 3,900 1,500 2,400 12.48 1622.4
3 September 3,900 1,500 2,400 12.48 1622.4
3 May 12,000 3,490 8,510 44.252 5752.76
3 May 12,000 3,490 8,510 44.252 5752.76
3 June 8,000 2,410 5,590 29.068 3778.84
3 June 8,000 2,410 5,590 29.068 3778.84
29946.8
4 July 4,500 1,440 3,060 15.912 2068.56
4 July 4,500 1,440 3,060 15.912 2068.56
4 August 4,100 1,510 2,590 13.468 1750.84
4 August 4,100 1,510 2,590 13.468 1750.84
4 September 3,900 1,500 2,400 12.48 1622.4
4 September 3,900 1,500 2,400 12.48 1622.4
4 May 12,000 3,490 8,510 44.252 5752.76
4 May 12,000 3,490 8,510 44.252 5752.76
4 June 8,000 2,410 5,590 29.068 3778.84
4 June 8,000 2,410 5,590 29.068 3778.84
29946.8
5 July 4,500 1,440 3,060 15.912 2068.56
5 July 4,500 1,440 3,060 15.912 2068.56
5 August 4,100 1,510 2,590 13.468 1750.84
5 August 4,100 1,510 2,590 13.468 1750.84
5 September 3,900 1,500 2,400 12.48 1622.4
5 September 3,900 1,500 2,400 12.48 1622.4
5 May 12,000 3,490 8,510 44.252 5752.76
5 May 12,000 3,490 8,510 44.252 5752.76
5 June 8,000 2,410 5,590 29.068 3778.84
5 June 8,000 2,410 5,590 29.068 3778.84
Site 4. Above confluence of Shanandoah and Potomac
Site 5. Above confluence of Shanandoah and Potomac
Cost for this site
Cost for this site
Site Site - Below Shenandoah Totals
Potomac River Month Flow Flow rate at this site Gals Bti Cost of just pesticide app @130.00/gal *
29946.8
6 July 4,500 1,440 3,060 15.912 2068.56
6 July 4,500 1,440 3,060 15.912 2068.56
6 August 4,100 1,510 2,590 13.468 1750.84
6 August 4,100 1,510 2,590 13.468 1750.84
6 September 3,900 1,500 2,400 12.48 1622.4
6 September 3,900 1,500 2,400 12.48 1622.4
6 May 12,000 3,490 8,510 44.252 5752.76
6 May 12,000 3,490 8,510 44.252 5752.76
6 June 8,000 2,410 5,590 29.068 3778.84
6 June 8,000 2,410 5,590 29.068 3778.84
29946.8
207667.2
7 July 1,580 8.216 1068.08
7 July 1,580 8.216 1068.08
7 August 1,510 7.852 1020.76
7 August 1,510 7.852 1020.76
7 September 1,530 7.956 1034.28
7 September 1,530 7.956 1034.28
6246.24
8 July 1,580 8.216 1068.08
8 July 1,580 8.216 1068.08
8 August 1,510 7.852 1020.76
8 August 1,510 7.852 1020.76
Site 6. Above confluence of Shanandoah and Potomac
Cost for this site
Williamsport **
Cost for this site
Total for Harper's Ferry area.
Shepardstown **
* In FY2018, the lowest bidder bid 80.95 per gallon nad we paid 37.50 per gal of pesticide. If the contractor supplies the insecticide 130.00 per gal is likely.
Site Site - Below Shenandoah Totals
Potomac River Month Flow Flow rate at this site Gals Bti Cost of just pesticide app @130.00/gal *
8 September 1,530 7.956 1034.28
8 September 1,530 7.956 1034.28
6246.24
9 July 1,580 8.216 1068.08
9 July 1,580 8.216 1068.08
9 August 1,510 7.852 1020.76
9 August 1,510 7.852 1020.76
9 September 1,530 7.956 1034.28
9 September 1,530 7.956 1034.28
6246.24
10 July 1,580 8.216 1068.08
10 July 1,580 8.216 1068.08
10 August 1,510 7.852 1020.76
10 August 1,510 7.852 1020.76
10 September 1,530 7.956 1034.28
10 September 1,530 7.956 1034.28
6246.24
HB 870 –Black Fly
Control Program
SPONSORED BY: DELEGATE NEIL PARROTT
THE HOUSE ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
MARCH 2, 2016
Black Fly –Simulium Jenningsi
•Black flies are small, swarming,
biting flies, locally called gnats.
•They breed in rivers--mainly the
Potomac--and fly up to 30 miles.
•They are a severe nuisance to
humans and animals, getting in the
eyes, ears, nose, and mouth.
Black Fly –Simulium Jenningsi
•Like mosquitos, only the females attack.
Often flying in swarms, they bite and
suck blood around the eyes, ears, scalp,
arms, and legs.
•Many people react to the bites with
itchy, long-lasting welts. Some people
are severely allergic to the bites.
•Black flies are present from spring
through fall, during most days
depending on conditions.
Black Fly –Simulium jenningsi
Black Fly –Simulium jenningsi
•The eggs are deposited in flowing
waters –won't be found in ponds.
•They are found in large streams and
rivers.
•Most clean, flowing waters have at least
one species of black fly.
•In our case, the majority are found in
the Potomac River.
•This affects Southern Washington, Frederick,
and parts of Montgomery County.
What Washington County has to say.
“It’s not uncommon to be standing with guests talking about the battlefield and
instead of having their focus on attacks and counterattacks of America’s bloodiest day
in military history, they are instead focused on aerial attacks from black flies. Their
minds are away from what they’re seeing --they’re just swatting at blackflies. You
have to be walking, or pray that the wind comes up.”
Randy Buchman, a tour guide at Antietam Battlefield
“In the summer, I can't even take my 2 year old outside to play because he gets
swarmed and attacked by these black flies. Bug spray doesn't work so he just misses
out of the best part of childhood which is playing in your back yard.”
Sarah DiCarlo Baker, Keedysville, Maryland
What Washington County has to say.
“As soon as the weather warms up a little, the gnats are out. Our family cannot enjoy picnics,
swimming in our pool or just sitting on the deck. My husband loves to garden, usually sprays
himself with bug spray and still ends up with bug bites that usually swell and are very
uncomfortable. We have swarms of gnats in our area.”
Christy Jones, Yarrowsburg, Maryland
“Other states have listened to their communities and have done something about it. I just
want to breathe without inhaling black flies!!!”
Carol Homan, Keedysville, Maryland
“They're in my hair...they're in my nose... they're in my mouth.They bite and they sting.
Black flies frequently ruin a pleasant afternoon in my garden and force me indoors.”
Kevin Raleigh, Middletown, Maryland
History –What has been done so far?
•In 2012, a group of my constituents
approached me about this problem.
•It affects the quality of life in our area as
well as tourism, at Antietam Battlefield, for
example.
•From May to October, you can’t go outside
without being assaulted by these pests.
•Kids don’t play outside, people don’t garden
–most outdoor activities are limited.
DNR: No
Authority to
establish a
program.
This is a letter I
received, after asking
what could be done.
December 14, 2012
DNR: No
Authority to
establish a
program.
Regrettably, the Department of
Natural Resources has no authority or
any role in black fly management in
Maryland and does not monitor this
nuisance insect in streams. Since we
do not know of any statewide program
for black fly suppression, at this time,
any monitoring would have to be done
at the local level as described in the
June 25, 2012 letter to you from the
Department of Agriculture Secretary
Earl “Buddy” Hance (copy attached).
This is a letter I
received, after asking
what could be done.
December 14, 2012
History –Department of
Entomology, Univ. of MD
•With the help of former Senator Chris Shank, the Entomology
Department at the University of MD got involved, got funding, and
started testing streams and rivers for the source of the black flies.
•The “Lamp Lab,” headed by William Lamp, director of the department,
made significant progress to identify the problem areas.
The Lamp Lab –2014 Objectives
Locate larval breeding sites within the Potomac River and its
larger tributaries.
◦Combined sampling of 2013 and 2014, S. jenningsi has now been
identified at:
◦6 locations within the Potomac River,
◦1 location on Antietam Creek
◦1 location on the Monocacy River
◦1 location on the Shenandoah River
◦DNA indicates more breeding locations will be found
The Lamp Lab –2014 Objectives
Find the geographic range of the nuisance problem.
•Responses in 2014 came from residents in both Washington and Frederick
counties (Only Washington County in 2013.)
•In addition, collection kits were distributed to residents in both counties.
•Of the 1087 identifiable flies collected by residents in 2014, all were found to be
black flies, S. jenningsi.
•In Montgomery and Prince George’s counties, specimens were also collected
from locations that we had not heard from residents –very low numbers.
•Findings: Primary nuisance regions appear to be within
Washington and Frederick counties.
The Lamp Lab –2014 Objectives
Determine the relationship between fly
distributions and land use.
•Fly Collection: An aerial net swung over the head of a
researcher –18 sweeps per location.
•Preliminary analysis:
•Paved areas in the sampling region were less likely
to contain black flies.
•Black flies were uncommon in the areas near
Frederick and Hagerstown (biggest cities.)
•Moderate to high nuisance levels found near the
smaller communities of Rohrersville, Keedysville,
Middletown, Thurmont, and Brunswick.
The Lamp Lab -Findings
•The yellow triangles are the breeding
sites the Department of Entomology
lab was able to identify over the last 2
years.
•You can see the history of their work,
surveys, and findings on the
website,mdblackfly.com, and the
specifics in the written testimony.
The Lamp Lab -Findings
•The Lamp Lab first received
nuisance complaints from residents
in Washington and Frederick
Counties in 2013.
•As of February 2016, they have
additionally received reports from
residents in Garrett, Montgomery,
and Cecil Counties.
•These reports do not appear to
indicate black flies are a new
occurrence in these counties, rather
that the residents are only now
learning of someone to contact
about the problem.
The Solution –Bti, Bacillus thuringiensis
israelensis
•Bti was invented and patented in 1979 by Leonard J. Goldberg.
•Bti , a natural soil bacteria, is used to control both black flies and
mosquitoes.
•Bti is practically non-toxic to humans and non-target insects and is
photodegradeable meaning it will not build up in the environment.
•Bt must be consumed by target insect’s larvae to activate the toxins; it is
not a contact killer.
•Different Bt strains affect different insects.
•VectoLex®CG, Aquabac®, and LarvX® are examples of common trade names for Bti.
•Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki (Btk) can be used for gypsy moth control. And example
is Foray 48B®.
What are other states doing?
•Pennsylvania, New York, Idaho, Florida, West
Virginia, and California have black fly control
programs, using Bti, to suppress these black flies at
the larval stage.
•Pennsylvania has the world’s second largest black
fly control program treating 1711 miles of rivers,
just after the World Health Organization (WHO).
•Douglas Orr –PA DEP, Program Specialist
(doorr@pa.gov)
Black Flies –Health Concerns
•These gnats have been known to carry parasites and
spread diseases to humans and livestock in other areas.
•Due to the spread of river blindness and other health
concerns, numerous programs have been established
throughout the world to control the black fly population
World Health Organization (WHO)
•Onchocerciasis, “River Blindness” –most
common cause of blindness in the world
•Caused by the parasitic worm and transmitted to
humans through exposure to repeated bites of infected
blackflies of the genus Similium.
•The World Health Organization has used Bti for
30 years to combat this devastating disease from
South America to Yemen with the majority of
affected areas in Central Africa.
•Bti is a proven solution.
(More info: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs374/en/.)
Agricultural Concerns
•"Apart from the annoyance and discomfort, black flies
cause economic losses through reduced beef and milk
production, reduced efficiency of agricultural and
industrial workers, and spread of diseases.”
•“In Canada, black flies transmit blood-borne parasites to
turkeys, geese, and ducks. Cattle (not previously exposed)
have died following a heavy attack by black flies in
Alberta.”
Source: http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex3321
Fish and Macroinvertebrate
Population
•Studies of Bti use conducted in Pennsylvania
show minimal impact on non-target species.
•Bti, which in PA is used at half the label rate
allowed by the EPA, has no effect on the fish
population.
Source: http://fishandboat.com/pafish/bass_black/smb2006/reebuck.pdf.
Bti for
Treating Black
Flies Has No
Effect on Fish
Population
Source: http://fishandboat.com/pafish/bass_black/smb2006/reebuck.pdf.
Bti for
Treating Black
Flies Has No
Effect on Fish
Population
HB 870 –What it does
•Establishes a black fly management and control
program.
•Sets up Washington County as the Pilot location to
begin the program.
HB 870 –What it does
•Costs to set up the program are minimal. The fiscal note
indicates $110,700 needed to hire a biologist and a
contractual seasonal employee within DNR to implement
the program in Washington County. Perhaps though,
existing personnel could be used to set up the program.
•Based on Pennsylvania’s program, the average cost to
treat a mile of a river is approximately $4,000.
•Using Pennsylvania’s average cost, to treat Washington
County’s 35 miles of the Potomac River would cost
approximately $140,000 for the year.
HB 870 –What it does
•The program will allow the state to work with
residents and county governments who want to start
a black fly program. Currently, there is no avenue in
Maryland to treat for black flies.
•Project funds can be obtained by grants, private
sources, local funds, or a shared funding approach to
manage and control the black fly population using
BTi, a natural bacterium which has been proven to
work safely in Pennsylvania for over 35 years.
Please vote favorably on HB 870 to:
•Manage and Control the Black Fly population.
•Increase the desirability for tourists to come to Maryland’s sites
like Antietam Battlefield and the C&O Canal.
•Enhance production of Dairy Cows.
•Enhance the livability of areas affected by black flies.
•Enable children in these areas to play outside more of the year.
Questions???
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Maryland Theatre Funding Request
PRESENTATION DATE: December 11, 2018
PRESENTATION BY: Jessica Green, Executive Director, The Maryland Theatre, Benito
Vattelana, Board President, The Maryland Theatre
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the request for funding from The Maryland
Theatre Association, Inc. in the amount of $__________________ for construction costs
associated with the Maryland Theatre Expansion Project.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Maryland Theatre (Theatre) is requesting $2 million for
construction costs associated with the Theatre’s expansion.
DISCUSSION: The Maryland Theatre is returning to the Board of County Commissioners
after an initial request in October 2017 for grant funding to support the construction of The
Maryland Theatre Expansion Project. The Theatre embarked on a major capital campaign in
September 2017 and was able to raise over $4 million in the first year through large private
pledges. In addition a public campaign was launched and continues to create public awareness
of the project to generate small gifts of $25 - $100. Current fundraising is over $5.5 million,
however a gap of $3 million remains. This level of fundraising was new to Theatre
representatives and required a variety of resources to be utilized and acquired. The Theatre’s
current request is for $2 million to assist in narrowing down the remaining funding gap. If
granted, these funds will be paid directly to the contractor, Morgan-Keller Construction.
The Theatre is confident that through continued private pledges and grant applications, that the
overall fundraising goal will be achieved. The receipt of this funding from the County will
enable the Theatre to focus resources to the operations of the expansion in order to meet the
goals for success of the new structure and the expectations for economic expenditures in our
downtown.
FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact will not be known until the amount of available funding
from the Board of Education component of the Urban Improvement Project which can be
redirected to the Theatre’s expansion is determined.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: Deny the request
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL TO BE USED: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Intergovernmental Cooperative Purchase (INGT-18-011) – Six (6) 2019 Chevrolet
Tahoe Police Pursuit Vehicles for the Washington County Sheriff’s Department.
PRESENTATION DATE: December 11, 2018
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Naugle, CPPB, Buyer, Purchasing Department, and Cody
Miller, Property Planning, Fleet Management, and Grants Manager, Washington County
Sheriff’s Department.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize by Resolution, for the Washington County
Sheriff’s Department to purchase six (6) 2019 Chevrolet Tahoe Police Pursuit Vehicles for a
total cost of $200,558.00 and to utilize the use of another jurisdiction’s contract (#001B9400184)
that was awarded by the State of Maryland Department of General Services Office of
Procurement and Logistics.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Code of Public Laws of Washington County, Maryland (the Public
Local Laws) §1-106.3 provides that the Board of County Commissioners may procure goods and
services through a contract entered into by another governmental entity, in accordance with the
terms of the contract, regardless of whether the County was a party to the original contract. The
State of Maryland Department of General Services Office of Procurement and Logistics took the
lead in soliciting the resulting agreement. If the Board of County Commissioners determines that
participation by Washington County would result in cost benefits or administrative efficiencies,
it could approve the purchase of this service in accordance with the Public Local Laws
referenced above by resolving that participation would result in cost benefits or in administrative
efficiencies.
The County will benefit with direct cost savings in the purchase of the vehicles because of the
economies of scale this buying group leveraged. I am confident that any bid received as a result
of an independent County solicitation would exceed the spend savings that the State of
Maryland’s bid provides through this agreement. Additionally, the County will realize savings
through administrative efficiencies as a result of not preparing, soliciting and evaluating a bid.
This savings/cost avoidance would, I believe, be significant.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted in the Washington County Sheriff’s Department
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) account (VEH006).
CONCURRENCES: Randy Wilkinson, Colonel, Washington County Sheriff’s Department
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
ALTERNATIVES: Process a formal bid and the County could possibly incur a higher cost for
the purchase, or do not award the purchase of vehicles.
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Construction Bid Award – Transit Bus Shelters
PRESENTATION DATE: December 11, 2018
PRESENTATION BY: Scott Hobbs, P.E., Director, Division of Engineering
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the bid for the Transit Bus Shelters contract to
the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, Lone Star Builders, Inc. of Clear Spring, MD for the
amount of $69,020.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The project was advertised in The Herald Mail, on the County’s web
site, and on the State of Maryland’s website, e-Maryland Marketplace. Three (3) bids were
received on Wednesday, November 21, 2018 as listed below and on the attached Bid Tabulation.
Contractor: Total Bid_
Lone Star Builders, Inc. $69,020.00
Colossal Contractors, Inc. $70,250.00
Priority Construction Corp. $112,237.50
The bids were evaluated and the low bid from Lone Star Builders, Inc. is in order. The
engineer’s estimate for this work is $65,000.
DISCUSSION: The project will include the installation of three (3) ADA accessible bus
shelters on new concrete pads. The bus shelters will be located along South Potomac Street
(Hagerstown Housing Authority), Frederick Street (Potterfield Pool), and East Potomac Street
(Williamsport Library). This is a 120 consecutive calendar day contract, and the project is
tentatively scheduled to start in late January 2019. The bid documents include Liquidated
Damages in the amount of $250.00 per calendar day for work beyond the completion date.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funding is available in Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) project (LDI037,
Transportation ADA). This work is part of a Federal Transit Administration (FTA) / Maryland
Transit Administration (MTA) initiative, and the County is receiving a grant for this project
(80% FTA/10% MTA/10% local share). The total local cost is approximately $7,000.
CONCURRENCES: Kevin Cerrone, Director of Transit
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Bid Tabulation, Aerial Maps
AUDIO/VISUAL TO BE USED: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
ITEM
DESCRIPTION NO.QTY.UNIT
MOBILIZATION 101 1 LS
MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC 102 1 LS
TEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNS 103 1 L.S.
CONSTRUCTION STAKEOUT 104 1 L.S.
UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION 201 40 C.Y
CONTINGENT: UNSUITABLE MATERIAL EXCAVATION 202 5 C.Y.
301 10 C.Y.
6" GRADED AGGREGATE BASE 502 100 S.Y.
FULL DEPTH SAW CUT 503 150 L.F.
Total
*denotes mathematical error
TABULATION
SHELTER INSTALLATION
No. MS-TR-218-12
NOVEMBER 21, 2018 at 2:00pm.
10,865.00 10,865.00 500.00 500.00 15,000.00 15,000.00
2,400.00 2,400.00 500.00 500.00 13,500.00 13,500.00
3,165.00 3,165.00 500.00 500.00 3,000.00 3,000.00
1,800.00 1,800.00 500.00 500.00 7,500.00 7,500.00
107.40 4,296.00 80.00 3,200.00 70.00 2,800.00
80.00 400.00 100.00 500.00 150.00 750.00
124.60 1,246.00 80.00 800.00 95.00 950.00
4,850.00 14,550.00 3,500.00 10,500.00 9,550.00 28,650.00
358.00 12,530.00 1,000.00 35,000.00 600.00 21,000.00
20.30 2,030.00 50.00 5,000.00 28.00 2,800.00
11.46 1,719.00 10.00 1,500.00 4.75 712.50
395.00 3,950.00 200.00 2,000.00 275.00 2,750.00
425.00 2,125.00 250.00 1,250.00 300.00 1,500.00
55.68 4,176.00 40.00 3,000.00 75.00 5,625.00
14.70 2,205.00 15.00 2,250.00 25.00 3,750.00
30.00 600.00 50.00 1,000.00 45.00 900.00
24.00 600.00 50.00 1,250.00 18.00 450.00
14.52 363.00 40.00 1,000.00 24.00 600.00
69,020.00$ 70,250.00$ 112,237.50$
Burtonsville, MDClear Spring, MD Baltimore, MD
Colossal Contractors, IncLone Star Builders, Inc.Priority Construction Corp.
1 OF 1
I1
Proposed Bus Shelter Location
0 50 100 150 200Feet
$
Leg end
I1 - Proposed Bus Shelter Location
- Road Centerlines
EastPotomacStreet
North
Artizan
Street
NorthArtizanStreet PeachtreeLane
ParkRoad
Williamspor t Librar y Proposed Bus Shelter
OthoHollandDrive
I1
Proposed Bus Shelter Location
0 75 150 225 300Feet
$
Leg end
I1 - Proposed Bus Shelter Location
- Road Centerlines
Potterfield Pool Proposed Bus Shelter
FrederickStreet
CommonwealthAvenue
EastFirstStreet
KenlyAvenue
EasternBoulevardTaylorAvenue
WestLeeStreet
WestBaltimoreStreet
SummitAvenue
HolburnAvenue
SouthProspectStreet
SouthPotomacStreet
Gerbers
Avenue
WestAntietamStreet
HoodStreet
South
Potomac
Street
I1
Proposed Bus Shelter Location
0 75 150 225 300Feet
$
Leg end
I1 - Proposed Bus Shelter Location
- Road Centerlines
Hag erstown Housing Authority Proposed Bus Shelter
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Brief the Board on the County’s Hiring Procedures
PRESENTATION DATE: December 11, 2018
PRESENTATION BY: Deb Peyton, Director, Health & Human Services
RECOMMENED MOTION: Informational Purpose Only
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The purpose of this agenda item is to brief the Board on the County’s hiring
procedures. The County’s hiring procedures have been updated to provide Human Resources, the
requesting departments, and the Board with consistency throughout the hiring process.
DISCUSSION: The Workflow Sheet was created to maintain consistency throughout the process. The
Workflow Sheet will be attached to the front of the hiring folder to provide a check-off mechanism
throughout the entire process. In addition, several other documents and processes were created and
updated to assist those involved; such as, Personnel Request, Job Advertisement Request, Job Applicant
Log Sheet, Approved Interview Questions, Candidate Evaluation Form, Applicant’s Authorization to
Release Information, Professional Telephone Reference Check, Personal Reference Check, Hiring
Department Recommendation Form, Human Resources Recommendation Form, Conditional Offer
Letter, and Thank You Letter. This information has provided structure to Human Resources and
requesting Departments. Upon full evaluation of these documents and procedures, the Hiring Policy will
be presented to the Board for approval.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: Robert Slocum, County Administrator
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Workflow Sheet and Conditional Offer Letter Sample
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Form 300FT
Revised: December 2018
Full Time Hiring Workflow Form
Position: Department:
Applications Provided to:
Interviewer: Interviewer:
Interviewer: Interviewer:
Advertising/Recruiting Process Department
Personnel request form submitted
Request to advertise to County Administrator
Positions grade 15 & up approved by BOCC
Position advertised in designated media
HR scans applications, creates application log
Department selects interviewees & sends to HR
HR schedules interviews
Interview schedule notification sent to department
*Complete with date and initials *
Hiring Process Department
HR sends the offer letter to the applicant
Offer accepted by applicant
Physical scheduled
New hire entered into Personnel Management System
Orientation scheduled
*Complete with date and initials *
Interview Process Department
Interview conducted
Position recommendation sheet (Form 700) completed & sent to HR
Documents returned to HR (applications, interview notes, & Interview Record Form)
HR reviews department’s recommendations
HR conducts reference checks / results communicated to department
HR sends conditional offer letter
Position request form submitted for closed session agenda
County Administrator’s office communicates closed session date
HR and requesting department present to the BOCC
*Complete with date and initials *
CONDITIONAL OFFER LETTER
EXEMPT – DIRECTOR LEVEL
EXTERNAL CANDIDATE
100 West Washington Street, Ste 2300 │ Hagerstown, MD 21740-4735 │P: 240-313-2350 │ F: 240-313-2351 │TDD: 7-1-1
WWW.WASHCO-MD.NET
Revised 12.2018
December 4, 2018
Name
Street
City, State Zip
Dear Mx Surname,
Washington County is pleased to present this conditional offer of employment to you for review and consideration of the XXX position.
This offer of employment is contingent upon approval by the Washington County Board of County Commissioners (Board), successful
completion of the pre-employment screening process, your ability to present proof of valid work authorization for the I-9, and our receipt
of a copy of your awarded XX Degree. If you are not currently a Washington County Maryland resident, you must also obtain residency in
Washington County, Maryland within 6 months of your start date.
We offer the following for your review and consideration:
Pay rate of $XX.XX per hour; paid bi-weekly
Employer paid Basic Life Insurance, Short and Long Term Disability
Defined Benefit Retirement Pension Plan – employee is required to contribute 6%
Low Cost Employee paid Medical, Dental, and Vision Insurance; Health Insurance deductions are taken on a pre-tax basis and are
effective first day of the month following date of hire
Health & Dependent Care Flexible Spending Accounts, 457(B) Retirement Plan
(10) Paid Vacation Days; (13) Paid Holidays; (6) Personal Days; (15) Sick Days annually
Pending Board approval your employment will begin with a 1 year probationary period during which your manager will assess if your
performance in this position is progressing satisfactorily.
This position is considered an Exempt position for purposes of the federal wage-hour law, which means that you will not receive
additional compensation for any hours worked over 40 per week. A work week is considered Monday through Friday with potential
overtime as business needs dictate. Employment for the Board of Washington County Commissioners is considered At-Will, this letter is
not to be considered an employment contract.
Pending Board approval, you will report directly to XX PERSON, POSITION.
We would like to thank you for your time and consideration and look forward to hearing from you in response to this conditional offer of
employment. Please let us know of your decision to accept this offer in writing within 5 business days of receipt of this letter or we will
consider that you are no longer interested in this position. Pending your acceptance and Board approval on MONTH XX, 201X, your
tentative start date will be MONTH XX, 201X.
Sincerely,
Debra Peyton
Director of Health & Human Services - Human Resources
I accept this offer pending Washington County Board of County Commissioner approval:
Signature Date
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Ethics Commission Members – Appointment Process
PRESENTATION DATE: December 11, 2018
PRESENTATION BY: Cort Meinelschmidt, County Commissioner
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Provide direction to staff for subsequent action by the Board.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Pursuant to the provisions of the Ethics Ordinance, the members of the
Ethics Commission are appointed by the County Commissioners. I would like to discuss a means
of formalizing the appointment of members.
DISCUSSION: While the responsibility rests with the County Commissioners to appoint
members of the Ethics Ordinance, I believe that a more formalized process would enhance the
non-political nature of the Ethics Commission. Accordingly, I think it appropriate that certain
community groups be consulted to nominate candidates for the Commission. If the
Commissioners agree, the process may be formalized in a resolution adopted by the Board.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form